Browsing
     by title


0-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

or enter first few letters:   
OK
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and Tolerability of Calcitonin in the Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis
Halkin, V; Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg

in BioDrugs : Clinical Immunotherapeutics, Biopharmaceuticals & Gene Therapy (1998), 10(4), 295-300

Calcitonin in general, and, more specifically, salmon calcitonin (salcatonin), has been known for 30 years to be a specific inhibitor of bone resorption. Studies have confirmed its efficacy in metabolic ... [more ▼]

Calcitonin in general, and, more specifically, salmon calcitonin (salcatonin), has been known for 30 years to be a specific inhibitor of bone resorption. Studies have confirmed its efficacy in metabolic bone diseases characterised by excessive bone resorption, such as osteoporosis. Most randomised studies in which salcatonin and oral calcium were administered for 1 to 5 years to recently postmenopausal women for the prevention of osteoporosis have shown that bone mineral density or bone content of the lumbar spine increased significantly, compared with a reduction among women receiving calcium only. Prospective studies have shown that salcatonin is effective in the treatment of established osteoporosis, reducing significantly the relative risk of new vertebral fractures. The benefits of salcatonin nasal spray therapy were observed in the majority of women studied, and it has been shown to be an effective alternative for osteoporotic women more than 5 years postmenopausal who refuse estrogens, or for whom estrogens are contraindicated. Finally, in established osteoporosis, nasal calcitonin possesses a potent analgesic effect. The well-demonstrated effects of nasal calcitonin permit it to be considered a well tolerated and efficient approach for prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 8 (4 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of intravenous ibandronate injections in postmenopausal osteoporosis: 2-year results from the DIVA study.
Eisman, John A; Civitelli, Roberto; Adami, Silvano et al

in Journal of Rheumatology (2008), 35(3), 488-97

OBJECTIVE: An effective and well tolerated intravenous (IV) bisphosphonate could provide a new treatment method for patients with osteoporosis. The Dosing IntraVenous Administration (DIVA) study was ... [more ▼]

OBJECTIVE: An effective and well tolerated intravenous (IV) bisphosphonate could provide a new treatment method for patients with osteoporosis. The Dosing IntraVenous Administration (DIVA) study was designed to identify the optimal ibandronate IV injection schedule for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis by comparing the efficacy and tolerability of 2- and 3-monthly injections with the previously evaluated daily oral ibandronate regimen. We report the effects on lumbar spine and proximal femur bone mineral density (BMD) and bone resorption markers over 2 years. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority study recruited 1395 women (aged 55-80 yrs; > or = 5 yrs since menopause) with osteoporosis [mean lumbar spine (L2-L4) BMD T-score < -2.5 and > or = -5.0]. Patients received IV ibandronate (2 mg every 2 mo or 3 mg every 3 mo) plus daily oral placebo, or 2.5 mg daily oral ibandronate plus 2- or 3-monthly IV placebo. Supplemental vitamin D (400 IU) and calcium (500 mg) were provided throughout the 2-year study. RESULTS: At 2 years, the 2- and 3-monthly IV regimens achieved statistically noninferior and also superior increases in lumbar spine BMD compared with the daily regimen (6.4% and 6.3% vs 4.8%, respectively; p < 0.001). Greater increases were also obtained with IV ibandronate versus daily in proximal femur BMD. Serum concentrations of the biochemical marker of bone resorption C-telopeptide of the alpha-chain of type I collagen were reduced to a similar extent in all treatment arms (53.4%-59.9%). The tolerability profile of the IV regimens was similar to that observed with daily oral therapy. CONCLUSION: Ibandronate IV injections are an effective and well tolerated treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis and provide a useful alternative to oral dosing. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 14 (4 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of lasmiditan, an oral 5-HT(1F) receptor agonist, for the acute treatment of migraine: a phase 2 randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, dose-ranging study.
Farkkila, Markus; Diener, Hans-Christoph; Geraud, Gilles et al

in Lancet Neurology (2012), 11(5), 405-13

BACKGROUND: Lasmiditan (COL-144) is a novel, centrally acting, highly selective 5-HT(1F) receptor agonist without vasoconstrictor activity that seemed effective when given as an intravenous infusion in a ... [more ▼]

BACKGROUND: Lasmiditan (COL-144) is a novel, centrally acting, highly selective 5-HT(1F) receptor agonist without vasoconstrictor activity that seemed effective when given as an intravenous infusion in a proof-of-concept migraine study. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of oral lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-ranging study in 43 headache centres in five European countries, patients with migraine with and without aura and who were not using prophylaxis were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1) to treat one moderate or severe attack at home with 50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg, or 400 mg lasmiditan, or placebo. Study drug and placebo were supplied in identical numbered tablet packs. The randomisation code was generated by an independent statistician. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was dose response for headache relief (moderate or severe becoming mild or none) at 2 h. The primary analysis was done in the modified intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00883051. FINDINGS: Between July 8 2009, and Feb 18, 2010, 512 patients were randomly assigned to treatment, 391 of whom received treatment. 86 patients received placebo (81 included in primary analysis) and 305 received lasmiditan (50 mg n=79, 100 mg n=81, 200 mg n=69, and 400 mg n=68 included in primary analysis). There was a linear association between headache response rate at 2 h and lasmiditan dose (Cochran-Armitage test p<0.0001). Every lasmiditan treatment dose significantly improved headache response at 2 h compared with placebo (lasmiditan 50 mg: difference 17.9%, 95% CI 3.9-32.1, p=0.022; 100 mg: 38.2%, 24.1-52.4, p<0.0001; 200 mg: 28.8%, 9.6-39.9, p=0.0018; 400 mg: 38.7%, 23.9-53.6, p<0.0001). The proportion of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events increased with increasing doses (53/82 [65%], 59/82 [72%], 61/71 [86%], and 59/70 [84%] for lasmiditan 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg, respectively vs 19/86 [22%] for placebo). Most adverse events were mild or moderate in intensity, with 16 of 82 (20%), 23 of 82 (28%), 28 of 71 (39%), and 31 of 70 (44%) of patients on lasmiditan 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg, respectively reporting a severe adverse event compared with five of 86 (6%) on placebo. The most common adverse events were CNS related and included dizziness, fatigue, vertigo, paraesthesia, and somnolence. INTERPRETATION: Oral lasmiditan seems to be safe and effective in the acute treatment of migraine. Further assessment in larger placebo-controlled and triptan-controlled trials are needed to assess the potential role of lasmiditan in acute migraine therapy. FUNDING: CoLucid Pharmaceuticals. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 21 (0 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of olmesartan medoxomil in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension - The OLMEBEST Study
Barrios, Vivencio; Boccanelli, Allesandro; Ewald, Silke et al

in Clinical Drug Investigation (2007), 27(8), 545-558

Background and objective: Achieving target BP is important to control the increased cardiovascular risk associated with uncontrolled hypertension. However, failure to respond to therapy is common with all ... [more ▼]

Background and objective: Achieving target BP is important to control the increased cardiovascular risk associated with uncontrolled hypertension. However, failure to respond to therapy is common with all classes of antihypertensive agents. Angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]) possess many of the positive features of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, with fewer adverse effects. However, many patients fail to respond adequately to low-dose monotherapy. This study examined whether olmesartan medoxomil dose titration and olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy were therapeutically equivalent in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension who had shown an inadequate response to low-dose olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy. Methods: This was a prospective, parallel group, partially randomised, doubleblind study set in 463 centres in nine European countries. 2306 male and female adult patients aged 18–75 years with mild to moderate essential hypertension (sitting diastolic BP [DBP] ≥90mm Hg and <110mm Hg) were enrolled. All enrolled patients received open-label olmesartan medoxomil 20mg once daily for 8 weeks. At the end of this period, patients whose BP had not normalised (sitting DBP ≥90mm Hg) were randomised to receive olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy (40mg once daily, n = 302) or olmesartan medoxomil (20mg once daily)/ hydrochlorothiazide (12.5mg once daily) combination therapy (n = 325) for 4 weeks. The main outcome measure was change in mean sitting DBP during randomised treatment. Results: After 8 weeks of open-label treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg/day, 76% of patients showed a DBP response (sitting DBP <90mm Hg or reduction of ≥10mm Hg). During the randomised phase of the study, both treatments were associated with further improvements in sitting SBP/DBP: a reduction of 5.3/5.1mm Hg with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day, and a reduction of 10.8/7.9mm Hg with olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy. Final mean BPs of 145.3/90.9mm Hg (olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day) and 140.7/88.7mm Hg (olmesartan medoxomil 20mg + hydrochlorothiazide) were achieved, compared with a mean BP of 160.8/100.5mm Hg at baseline. The two treatments were not therapeutically equivalent. Sitting DBP showed a response and was normalised (<90mm Hg) in 62% and 47% of olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy patients, respectively. In the combination therapy group, these endpoints were achieved by 71% (response) and 59% (normalisation) of patients. Treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day was associated with a lower frequency of adverse events than olmesartan medoxomil/ hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy (21.5% vs 28.3%, respectively). Conclusion: For patients who did not achieve adequate BP control after initial treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg/day, olmesartan medoxomil dose titration (to 40 mg/day) or addition of hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 mg/day) elicited a sitting DBP response in the majority of patients who had failed to respond to low-dose monotherapy, and normalisation of sitting DBP in approximately 50% of patients. Both these strategies represent effective and well tolerated treatment options in patients who show an inadequate response to low-dose monotherapy with olmesartan medoxomil. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 42 (2 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of olmesartan medoxomil in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension - The OLMEBEST study
Barrios, V.; Boccanelli, A.; Ewald, S. et al

in Current Medical Research & Opinion (2006), 22(7), 1375-1380

Background and objective: Achieving target BP is important to control the increased cardiovascular risk associated with uncontrolled hypertension. However, failure to respond to therapy is common with all ... [more ▼]

Background and objective: Achieving target BP is important to control the increased cardiovascular risk associated with uncontrolled hypertension. However, failure to respond to therapy is common with all classes of antihypertensive agents. Angiotensin H type I receptor antagonists (angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]) possess many of the positive features of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, with fewer adverse effects. However, many patients fail to respond adequately to low-dose monotherapy. This study examined whether olmesartan medoxomil dose titration and olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy were therapeutically equivalent in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension who had shown an inadequate response to low-dose olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy. Methods: This was a prospective, parallel group, partially randomised, double-blind study set in 463 centres in nine European countries. 2306 male and female adult patients aged 18-75 years with mild to moderate essential hypertension (sitting diastolic BP [DBP] >= 90mm Hg and < 110mm Hg) were enrolled. All enrolled patients received open-label olmesartan medoxomil 20mg once daily for 8 weeks. At the end of this period, patients whose BP had not normalised (sitting DBP >= 90mm Hg) were randomised to receive olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy (40mg once daily, n = 302) or olmesartan medoxomil (20mg once daily)/ hydrochlorothiazide (12.5mg once daily) combination therapy (n = 325) for 4 weeks. The main outcome measure was change in mean sitting DBP during randomised treatment. Results: After 8 weeks of open-label treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg/day, 76% of patients showed a DBP response (sitting DBP < 90mm Hg or reduction of >= 10mm Hg). During the randomised phase of the study, both treatments were associated with further improvements in sitting SBP/DBP: a reduction of 5.3/5. 1 mm Hg with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day, and a reduction of 10.8/7.9mm Hg with olmesartan medoxomil/thydrochlorothiazide combination therapy. Final mean BPs of 145.3/90.9mm Hg (olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day) and 140.7/88.7mm Hg (olmesartan medoxomil 20mg + hydrochlorothiazide) were achieved, compared with a mean BP of 160.8/ 100.5mm Hg at baseline. The two treatments were not therapeutically equivalent. Sitting DBP showed a response and was normalised (< 90mm Hg) in 62% and 47% of olmesartan medoxomil monotherapy patients, respectively. In the combination therapy group, these endpoints were achieved by 71 % (response) and 59% (normalisation) of patients. Treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 40 mg/day was associated with a lower frequency of adverse events than olmesartan medoxomil/hydrochlorothiazide combination therapy (21.5% vs 28.3%, respectively). Conclusion: For patients who did not achieve adequate BP control after initial treatment with olmesartan medoxomil 20 mg/day, olmesartan medoxomil dose titration (to 40 mg/day) or addition of hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 mg/day) elicited a sitting DBP response in the majority of patients who had failed to respond to low-dose monotherapy, and normalisation of sitting DBP in approximately 50% of patients. Both these strategies represent effective and well tolerated treatment options in patients who show an inadequate response to low-dose monotherapy with olmesartan medoxomil. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 28 (7 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of once-monthly oral ibandronate in postmenopausal osteoporosis: 2 year results from the MOBILE study
Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg; Adami, S.; Lakatos, P. et al

in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2006), 65(5), 654-661

BACKGROUND: Reducing bisphosphonate dosing frequency may improve suboptimal adherence to treatment and therefore therapeutic outcomes in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Once-monthly oral ibandronate has been ... [more ▼]

BACKGROUND: Reducing bisphosphonate dosing frequency may improve suboptimal adherence to treatment and therefore therapeutic outcomes in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Once-monthly oral ibandronate has been developed to overcome this problem. OBJECTIVE: To confirm the 1 year results and provide more extensive safety and tolerability information for once-monthly dosing by a 2 year analysis. METHODS: MOBILE, a randomised, phase III, non-inferiority study, compared the efficacy and safety of once-monthly ibandronate with daily ibandronate, which has previously been shown to reduce vertebral fracture risk in comparison with placebo. RESULTS: 1609 postmenopausal women were randomised. Substantial increases in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) were seen in all treatment arms: 5.0%, 5.3%, 5.6%, and 6.6% in the daily and once-monthly groups (50 + 50 mg, 100 mg, and 150 mg), respectively. It was confirmed that all once-monthly regimens were at least as effective as daily treatment, and in addition, 150 mg was found to be better (p<0.001). Substantial increases in proximal femur (total hip, femoral neck, trochanter) BMD were seen; 150 mg produced the most pronounced effect (p<0.05 versus daily treatment). Independent of the regimen, most participants (70.5-93.5%) achieved increases above baseline in lumbar spine or total hip BMD, or both. Pronounced decreases in the biochemical marker of bone resorption, sCTX, observed in all arms after 3 months, were maintained throughout. The 150 mg regimen consistently produced greater increases in BMD and sCTX suppression than the 100 mg and daily regimens. Ibandronate was well tolerated, with a similar incidence of adverse events across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Once-monthly oral ibandronate is at least as effective and well tolerated as daily treatment. Once-monthly administration may be more convenient for patients and improve therapeutic adherence, thereby optimising outcomes. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 20 (4 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of once-monthly oral ibandronate in postmenopausal osteoporosis: 2 Year results from the MOBILE study (Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2006) 65, (654-661))
REGINSTER, Jean-Yves ULg; Adami, S.; Lakatos, P. et al

in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2008), 67(2), 280

[No abstract available]

Detailed reference viewed: 15 (3 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of rimonabant in overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled study.
Scheen, André ULg; Finer, Nick; Hollander, Priscilla et al

in Lancet (2006), 368(9548), 1660-72

BACKGROUND: Rimonabant, a selective cannabinoid type 1 receptor blocker, reduces bodyweight and improves cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors in non-diabetic overweight or obese patients. The aim of ... [more ▼]

BACKGROUND: Rimonabant, a selective cannabinoid type 1 receptor blocker, reduces bodyweight and improves cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors in non-diabetic overweight or obese patients. The aim of the RIO-Diabetes trial was to assess the efficacy and safety of rimonabant in overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes that was inadequately controlled by metformin or sulphonylureas. METHODS: 1047 overweight or obese type 2 diabetes patients (body-mass index 27-40 kg/m2) with a haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) concentration of 6.5-10.0% (mean 7.3% [SD 0.9] at baseline) already on metformin or sulphonylurea monotherapy were given a mild hypocaloric diet and advice for increased physical activity, and randomly assigned placebo (n=348), 5 mg/day rimonabant (360) or 20 mg/day rimonabant (339) for 1 year. Two individuals in the 5 mg/day group did not receive double-blind treatment and were thus not included in the final analysis. The primary endpoint was weight change from baseline after 1 year of treatment. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00029848. FINDINGS: 692 patients completed the 1 year follow-up; numbers in each group after 1 year were much the same. Weight loss was significantly greater after 1 year in both rimonabant groups than in the placebo group (placebo: -1.4 kg [SD 3.6]; 5 mg/day: -2.3 kg [4.2], p=0.01 vs placebo; 20 mg/day: -5.3 kg [5.2], p<0.0001 vs placebo). Rimonabant was generally well tolerated. The incidence of adverse events that led to discontinuation was slightly greater in the 20 mg/day rimonabant group, mainly due to depressed mood disorders, nausea, and dizziness. INTERPRETATION: These data indicate that 20 mg/day rimonabant, in combination with diet and exercise, can produce a clinically meaningful reduction in bodyweight and improve HbA1c and a number of cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors in overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by metformin or sulphonylureas. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 167 (3 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan tablets in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation for the acute treatment of migraine: Results of a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled study
Carpay, J.; Schoenen, Jean ULg; Ahmad, F. et al

in Clinical Therapeutics (2004), 26(2), 214-223

Background: Sumatriptan tablets have been developed in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation designed to facilitate tablet disintegration and drug dispersion and to potentially mitigate the ... [more ▼]

Background: Sumatriptan tablets have been developed in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation designed to facilitate tablet disintegration and drug dispersion and to potentially mitigate the effects of gastric stasis that can accompany migraine. Objective: This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan 50- and 100-mg tablets in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release formulation compared with those of placebo in patients with migraine. Methods: This clinical trial had a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group design. Exclusion criteria included >6 migraines monthly during either of the 2 months before screenings uncontrolled hypertension; suspected or confirmed cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease, and ophthalmic, basilar, or hemiplegic migraine. Sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg and placebo were taken on an outpatient basis during the mild-pain phase of a single migraine attack. Patients recorded details of the treated migraine on a diary card and rated pain severity immediately before dosing and 30 minutes, 45 minutes, I hour, and 2 hours after dosing using a 4-point scale (from 0 = none to 3 = severe). The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients who were pain free 2 hours after dosing. Additional efficacy end points were the proportion of patients who were pain free at 30 minutes, 45 minutes, and 1 hour after dosing, the proportion who were migraine free through 2 hours after dosing; and the proportion with a sustained pain-free response. Results: Patients' mean age ranged from 39.7 to 41.5 years across the 3 groups, and the majority were women (79.7%-85.9%) and white (98.7%-100%). One hundred thirty-seven patients received sumatriptan 50 mg, 142 sumatriptan 100 mg, and 153 placebo. In the intent-to-treat population (n = 432), 51.1% of patients who received sumatriptan 50 mg and 66.2% of patients who received sumatriptan 100 mg were pain free 2 hours after dosing, compared with 19.6% of the placebo group (P < 0.001, each sumatriptan dose vs placebo). In an exploratory analysis, the 2-hour pain-free rate with sumatriptan 100 mg was significantly better than that with sumatriptan 50 mg (P = 0.007). Significantly more patients who received sumatriptan 100 mg were pain free compared with placebo at 30 minutes (P < 0.01), 45 minutes (P < 0.001), and 1 hour after dosing (P < 0.001); similar pain-free results were observed in patients who received sumatriptan 50 mg at 45 minutes (P < 0.05) and 1 hour (P < 0.01). In the per-protocol population (n = 313), pain-free efficacy 2 hours after dosing was 52.7% with sumatriptan 50 mg and 74.8% with sumatriptan 100 mg, compared with 21.0% with placebo (P < 0.001, each sumatriptan dose VS placebo). These rates were greater than those in the overall study population, ∼12.0% of whom treated moderate or severe pain. The only drug-related adverse events reported in ≥3% of patients in any treatment group were nausea and vomiting (<1%, 5%, and 2% in the sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg and placebo groups, respectively), chest symptoms (2 %, 3 %, and 0%), and malaise and fatigue (1%, 3 %, and < 1%). No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions: In this study, sumatriptan tablets in a fast-disintegrating, rapid-release oral formulation provided pain-free efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine. Efficacy was maximized with the 100-mg dose compared with the 50-mg dose, and by treating early when pain was mild. In the intent-to-treat population, 51.1% of patients who received sumatriptan 50 mg and 66.2% of those who received sumatriptan 100 mg were pain free 2 hours after dosing. In the per-protocol population, 3 of 4 patients taking the 100-mg tablets for mild pain within 1 hour of its onset were pain free at 2 hours. Sumatriptan tablets were generally well tolerated. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 30 (0 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerance of a new formulation of oral tiludronate (tablet) in the treatment of Paget's disease of bone
Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg; Treves, R; Renier, JC et al

in Calcified Tissue International (1993), 52(S1), 66

Detailed reference viewed: 13 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy and tolerance of a new formulation of oral tiludronate (tablet) in the treatment of Paget's disease of bone
Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg; Treves, R; Renier, JC et al

in Calcified Tissue International (1993), 52(S2), 82

Detailed reference viewed: 10 (2 ULg)
Full Text
See detailEfficacy assessment of Candida oleophila (strain O) and Pichia anomala (strain K) against major postharvest diseases of citrus fruits in Morocco.
Lahlali, R.; Serrhini, M. N.; Jijakli, Haissam ULg

in comm. appl. biol. sci. Ghent University (2004), 69(4), 601-609

Detailed reference viewed: 66 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEfficacy assessment of Pichia guilliermondii strain Z1, a new biocontrol agent, against citrus blue mould in Morocco under the influence of temperature and relative humidity
Lahlali, Rachid; Hamadi, Younes; El Guilli, Mohammed et al

in Biocontrol Science (2011), 56

Detailed reference viewed: 144 (6 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe efficacy in vitro and in vivo of bacteriocin against Erwinia amylovora : comparison of biological and chemical control of fire blight
Jabrane, A.; Deckers, T.; Ledoux, L. et al

in Acta Horticulturae (1996), 411

Detailed reference viewed: 22 (0 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe efficacy of a communication skills training program : is it possible to predict assessment and supportive skills learning among residents?
Bragard, Isabelle ULg; Merckaert, I.; Libert, Y. et al

in Psycho-oncology (2010, May), 19(Suppl.2)(1-313), 248

Detailed reference viewed: 15 (0 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe efficacy of a communication skills training program on successive sequences of breaking bad news simulated consultation : A randomized controlled study
Gibon, A.-S.; Merckaert, I.; Libert, Y. et al

in Psycho-oncology (2009, June), 18 (Suppl. 2)

Detailed reference viewed: 14 (0 ULg)